4 responses so far ↓

• 1 salmanit // Jul 8, 2008 at 12:48 pm

  Watch Mustafa Kamal addressed Business Community Shocking Video Must watch it Both Parts

  http://unbealiveblenews.blogspot.com/

• 2 Ilyas khan Baloch // Jul 8, 2008 at 8:45 pm

  Dear Sir/Madam,

  Dare to raise your voice for the inevitable socio-political change in Pakistan, to empower Pakistani people, whom the country belongs to.

  Since the creation of Pakistan the Pakistani people have been left at a distance from the corridors of power so that the ruling elite can do what they wanted to do in favour of their own interests, leaving the Pakistani people at the mercy of circumstances. As this policy is a denial of the right of Pakistani people to rule their own country according to their aspirations and desires - a country which can provide equal opportunity to all without any discrimination, leading to establishment of a welfare society. Only a society based on tolerance, equality and justice can be the real guarantee for a prosperous and strong Pakistan, therefore we must raise our voices and express our concerns at this crucial moment in Pakistan’s history – to do otherwise would lead to a disaster, a point of no return for our beloved country.

  We have already lost the major part of Pakistan in 1971 simply to save the centralised sole power whose sole intention was to exploit this country for the ruling elite class. A nation was divided for the sole interest of very few. In the present circumstances we are once again slowly and painfully dragging our sovereignty at stake, only this time for the external interest. It is ironic that this is once again being done in the name of national interest. We must remind our leaders that the real national interest is the interest of Pakistani people at large.

  Mr.Musharaf, is not a problem nor the restoration of chief justice can make a difference, rather it is the prevailing socio-political system which is destroying our national institutions and victimizing the patriotic people like Dr.Qadeer khan, who provided a strong sense of security, achievement and pride to the nation - we can no more tolerate the humiliation of patriotic Pakistanis for the pleasures of external interests.

  The current system with centralize power at the centre which is in the hands of a few, wherein transparency and accountability can not be established, is responsible for all the mess we are currently in and requires a change for the prosperity of Pakistani people. Pakistani people have been deprived from their right to rule this country in all the 60 years of independence – this must stop, otherwise exploitation and injustice will continue to exist in one form or the other.

  The only way out of these crucial circumstances is to empower the common Pakistani at a grass route level i.e. the change of system. This change is inevitable in order to achieve a prosperous Pakistan, which is able to provide basic guarantees for the creation of welfare state, where in public representatives and institutions are answerable and accountable to the masses.

  Kindly see web site….www.idp.org.pk

  Kindly acknowledge with your comments.

  Ilyas khan Baloch
  Organizer Islamic Democratic Party

• 3 oal // Jul 8, 2008 at 9:51 pm

  Pervez Musharraf has been for Pakistan a strong contemporary politician, fully able with less encumbrance from fundamentalists to guide a development that has accommodated global interests and produced substantial defense and financial benefits for Pakistanis. How those benefits flow down to the street and how constituent concerns flow back into political empowerment may have set themes for the way Pakistan looks at its problems.

  Corruption has been an issue in many developing countries, not only Pakistan, and certainly not only Islamic ones. Kenya slipped a step toward civil war over the issue this past year; Zimbabwe, a true dictatorship, has relied on it to shape its culture despite that system destroying its agriculture and taking the economy with it; no one who reads about Afghanistan with its possibly parallel flows of narcodollars and defense spending can miss it: for all steeped in corrupt systems, the business of personal relationships has proven more powerful than alternative even-handed and comparatively disinterested and transparent public administrative or bureaucratic processes.

  Compounding the problem of private interests and networks getting tangled in the public weal, the embrace or reversion–choose the term most appealing according to where you stand–to a religious hardline makes doing business with the world a little more difficult, but it’s really the onset of violence through that channel that diminishes both constituent and investor confidence in national business, currency, and government.

  Economic or political militancy may evolve toward political accommodations or ends; not so religious militancy, which would seem not much concerned with such niceties as “constituent or investor confidence”: that motivation wants a culture-wide conformance to behavior fit to its social vision as it passes by all other public interests. That path in Somalia, which is essentially without a sufficiently pervasive central government, corrupt or otherwise, has led to multiple assassinations and kidnappings of persons associated with humanitarian missions and the spectacle of fighting over and trading control of debased, depopulating, and relatively miserable unarmed centers and regions.

  For Pakistan, Musharraf’s government rejected as civil insurrection on its face the expertly-sponsored, student-operated armory, unilateral actions, and overall mission at Lal Masjid, but such battles do not, perhaps cannot, transform the basis for such ideas, which leaves all less involved between the proverbial rock–a hard to see government operating through multiple channels–and a hard place–an ongoing cultural movement and militant bid for influence, power, and control unresponsive to the full spread of contemporary constituent needs, including whatever true want there may be for responsible and responsive democratic institutions.

  To offset what Musharraf’s administration has meant to Pakistan would seem to require encouragement, a gentle word here, for decent local administration everywhere, but impeded by corruption on one side and inhibited (or eliminated) by violence on the other, it would seem hard going going for every civic leader and planner who would wish to work for people without favoritism and free of dogma.

• 4 leo // Jul 25, 2008 at 2:55 pm

  long live our president
  long live pakistan

Leave a Comment